Bulls Beat #200 - Rose tidbits

Bulls Beat #200 - Rose tidbits

I discuss some heresay rumors about Derrick Rose as well as some more talk about the collective bargaining agreement.

Bulls Beat #200 - Rose Tidbits


Leave a comment
  • Doug, you say Boozer is "The king of empty stats", and I'm not sure I understand what you're basing that on. "Empty stats" would imply that his numbers don't correlate to wins. Meanwhile, I think he's been the leading, or second leading, scorer and rebounder on his team (Jazz or Bulls), the past 5 or so years, and each year that team has won right around 50 games (or more, most of the time), while also having fairly long playoff runs. This stats don't seem "empty" to me.

    The guy was clearly injured in the Playoffs. I think he deserves a little more credit for how well he played during the season, and for helping us to 60+ wins. Also, a little leeway (or at least the same that Rose and Noah got), for the way he performed in the Playoffs. I know his defense is fairly awful, and that his contract, and laid back personality, make him an easy scapegoat, but as far as reasons why the Bulls got beat in the playoffs goes, I'd put him fairly far down on that list.

  • In reply to Juiceboxjerry:

    You are correct. I do not believe Boozer's stats correlate to wins. When you look at his advanced stats, +/- and other factors there is a significant piece of evidence that this is the case.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Luckily (and I use that word loosely) Boozer has missed a lot of games so we can test the theory.

    Boozer's teams have been 3.93 points worse on offense but 3.09 points better on defense without him. So overall he does seem to have a positive impact, even considering his backup was pretty good for most of his time on the Jazz.

  • In reply to Shakes:

    Per, his net +/- has been negative the past three years. I'm not sure what you are trying to show on the link, it's hard for me to read or understand what it is or what year it refers to, nor does it seem to point to the data you are showing.

    There was a better link that showed Boozer's advanced stats than the one, but I can't immediately find it.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    And I say, better in the sense, that I'm not really a believer in +/-. I just couldn't find the other link.

    However, when I watch Boozer, he seems to give up so much on defense, and he doesn't generate his own offense. He scores his high efficiency points by playing off of his PG and getting easier hoops (not that this is a bad thing per se, we need someone who can do that obviously).

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    How many players can "generate their own offense" though? And I mean generate it with an efficiency you'd WANT them to? Now limit it to just bigs. How many players in the league are we even talking about that Boozer is deficient offensively when compared to? Pretty much every big relies on someone else to generate plays for them. That's the role of the big guy in today's game, there's nobody who can post up for themselves and make something happen on their own.

    I guess I don't see that because points came off the end of an assist that they're an empty stat.

  • In reply to Shakes:

    There's not a single big man in the NBA making as much as Boozer who can't generate his own offense better than Boozer. At least none who come to mind.

    So yes, there aren't tons of guys who do that, but we brought Boozer in on the basis that he could.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    I'm not sure we brought Boozer on as a guy who could create for himself. At least I didn't expect him to play anything other than the style he did last year. I guess if you bought into the myth he was a low post scorer then maybe you'd be disappointed, but I assume the Bulls knew what they were getting into.

    As far as your assertion about big men making Boozer's salary:

    Rashard Lewis, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Elton Brand and Antawn Jamison all made more than Boozer and were all (IMO) worse at creating their own offense last year. Of course lets not talk about the defensive gulf between some of those guys and Boozer!

    Amare is a similarly bad defender and is about on par or perhaps worse than Boozer at creating for himself (he really struggled after the Melo trade once he no longer got pick and rolls run for him), although he's more deadly with a point guard creating for him.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Sorry I should have given some context, it's from this article:

    Basically the table looks at players who missed a significant number of games in a particular season and takes the team's performance in games they missed vs games they played (ie attempting to avoid some of the pitfalls of +/-, such as players playing with other strong players and getting a good +/- like Bogans does). If you're empty stats surely your team wouldn't miss not having you, no?

    It doesn't include this year, but it does suggest the Jazz were a worse team when Boozer missed time, even though they had a strong backup in Millsap. Boozer isn't an empty stat guy, I don't think he's quite as good as the raw numbers, but he's still a positive impact on his team.

  • In reply to Shakes:

    I agree that Boozer's overall impact is positive. I just don't think it's remotely worth his salary positive.

    In terms of other players you mentioned, Brand, Duncan, Garnett, and Jamison are all at the end of deals they signed when they were much better than Boozer at creating offense. I'm not sure that I'd even agree with your take that those guys are worse than Boozer at creating their own offense either. Certainly not Duncan. I wouldn't say so with Brand either. Garnett, maybe but it's hard to say because it's not his role. I'd definitely disagree about Amare as well though, you're right that he's most deadly in a pick and roll scenario as well.

    I agree with you on Rashard Lewis, that was one of the most disastrous signings ever.

    I do think Boozer, when playing well, can have a positive impact on the game, but I don't trust him to play well when it matters. I'm not upset we signed him. It was worth the gamble, and I agree, the Bulls knew what they were getting.

    There's a reason Amare got 25 million more.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Like what? +/- is hardly "significant" evidence, as you said yourself you're not a big believer. All his advanced offensive stats are fairly strong. There's really no reliable defensive statistic that backs up your claims about his defense. The fact that he was starting on the best defense in the league is good enough evidence for me to say he's at least "decent".

  • In reply to Juiceboxjerry:

    I don't have the link, but when we signed him there was a big advanced metric thread showing how Boozer affect his team that had more correlative data than simple adjusted +/-.

  • NBA Players are not getting an 8% bonus. During the season 8% of players’ paychecks are withheld and put in escrow. (Think of it as a paycheck deduction, we are all familiar with that). At season’s end:
    1) the calculations of BRI and Players’ Total Salaries are made.
    2) the players’ escrow is adjusted upward or downward so Players’ Total Salaries exactly equal 57% of BRI.
    3) the adjusted escrow is returned back to players. It was their money to begin with, it was withheld from their paychecks during the season.

    This escrow repayment may be more than the 8% withheld if player salaries were below 57% of BRI. This year for the first time that is the case. Players get the 8% ($160 million) that was earlier withheld from their paychecks, plus an additional $26 million to adjust Players’ Total Salaries to exactly 57% of BRI.

    If the BRI calculation determined Players’ Total Salaries were above 57% of BRI (this is more common), the escrow would be adjusted downward below the $160 million that was earlier withheld from the players’ paychecks – to an amount that adjusts Players’ Total Salaries to exactly 57% of BRI. And then that lower escrow amount would be returned to the players.

    So at the end of every season the players always get an adjusted escrow repayment to make the Players Total Salaries equal 57% of BRI. But usually the annual escrow repayment is much smaller. In the past Player’s Total Salaries always exceed BRI so the escrow was always adjusted downwards. This year is the first time the escrow was adjusted upwards because this is the first year Player’s Total Salaries fell short of 57% of BRI.

  • In reply to Edward:

    My bad, I misread the article, I thought this was 8% above the escrow amount.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Most of the articles on this subject are actually miswritten. The writers themselves don't understand the finances behind the escrow situation.

    It reminds me of the reporting about the so-called "Roster Depreciation Allowance". Many of the articles were stating that teams got to deduct part of the players salaries as depreciation, in addition to deducting the salary expense.

    Of course this was all false. RDA is just a poor name for depreciation of the purchase price of the team for a period of 15 years. If a team is owned longer than 15 years there's no more depreciation of the purchase price until the team is sold to a new owner.

    Sometimes we need finance/accounting/law people to write some of the sports articles. I think the potential decertification and anti-trust lawsuit being advocated by agents is such a topic.
    - IMO, the players should decertify and sue very soon if the owners don't quickly become more reasonable - which they won't!

  • In reply to Edward:

    Edward, I wish this was reddit so I could upvote everything you write.

  • In reply to Seth:

    I am flattered. Thank you.

  • I. Not so surprising news about Rose's entourage/buddies. It is human nature to pile on when you have a golden goose. Will Rose be more creative and start some company from his earnings and let people manage them rather than just hand-over money/things to his needy friends/family? Hope he helps them but doesn't let that interfere with his real job of playing for the Bulls. Without championship success, he will not be adored forever.

    2. It might be a lot of people have his ears about Reinsdorf's tendency not to pay too much salary unless required. Not sure though it is a big issue with Rose.

    3. I think Boozer is not empty stats guy. It was more to do with Noah unable to do anything on offense which prevented Boozer from having his space. Plus, Boozer's injuries definitely hurt him and we saw it live. Not so sure if Noah's ankle injury is the same or a new one. This off-season is about Noah and SG. If those two positions don't improve, the Bulls are toast.

  • I think there are only a few rumors that were reported that I buy. I dont think DRose went to management and demanded changes, but did he meet with the team for solutions to the Miami problem yes. I remember KC Johnson on a radio show a month ago stating that the Bulls are planning something big once the CBA situation is resolved, and it might tie into the story of DRose coming away from their meeting with a positive feeeling. I absolutely buy that MJ gave DRose some tough love after ECF. DRose should not even be fazed by Lebron after the Finals he had. Mark my words that somewhere down the road a crucial play will again be decided on a isolation between DRose and Lebron, and DRose will get it done.

  • Sounds like our guy is doing pretty well.

  • We did a photo shoot with Derrick Rose here in Manila. I said to him "Let's win it next season". He said, smiling, "We will. We will."

  • In reply to boogernights:

    Just waiting for the preseason press conference?

    Why can't I be NBA Finals MVP? Why? I worked hard. I put in the time.

  • I love it Doug. I too cant wait until the pre season press conference. I hope this lockout ends soon .

Leave a comment